In recent weeks, a few light rail opponents have raised the specter of light rail transit being “dangerous,” with crime being “a real problem” on light rail lines. These opponents have characterized crime as one of the major reasons why Kansas City should not pursue light rail. But a review of the situation and some stats shows any general association of light rail and crime may be distorting light rail’s actual safety level.

   That’s not to say there isn’t some crime on light rail lines. There is. Just not much — in fact, riding light rail is safer than living in Johnson County suburbs.   This is Part 1 of a two-part blog post and will deal with light rail crime in different cities.

   Wayne Flaherty, a Johnson Countian who is against Kansas City pursuing light rail, recently wrote to the city’s light rail citizens task force imploring it to discuss light rail crime, because it’s “a real problem.” (The task force didn’t end up addressing it.) He included accounts from Portland. There, the MAX light rail system has had some trouble with crime. A story in Portland’s Oregonian newspaper last fall quoted a police sergeant saying “the MAX has been a living nightmare for us,” with fights, guns displayed, even stabbings.

   Randal O’Toole, another anti-rail crusader with the libertarian Cato Institute, keeps a blog in which he also has chronicled crime incidents on Portland’s system. One post noted how a brawl closed down part of the light rail line last fall. In addition, in a recent study done to dissuade Kansas City from considering light rail, he also called light rail “dangerous.”

   However, three things should be noted:

   1) All these Portland crime reports involve the same portion of the light rail system, a portion that runs through crime-infested neighborhoods known for drug dealing and ex-convict residents. One area carries the nickname “Felony Flats.” The lesson: It’s not light rail that’s dangerous, it’s the neighborhood it runs through.

   2) When pointing to light rail crime incidents, Flaherty and O’Toole only bring up Portland, no other cities. O’Toole was in Kansas City last week and met with The Star’s Editorial Board, so I asked him where else crime was a problem on light rail systems, other than one part of Portland’s. He didn’t name one. In his Kansas City study, he also didn’t name any other cities besides Portland with crime problems on their light rail lines. The lesson: Portland has had some problems, while lots of other cities with light rail haven’t.

   In response, O’Toole says in an email to The Star: “Portland may be the only city where light-rail crime has turned into a big issue. But the numbers speak for themselves.”

   3) Finally, there isn’t much actual research on the issue of light rail and crime, but what’s been done shows light rail is more associated with decreasing crime than increasing crime. One study done in San Diego found areas around stations performed better over time (crime increases were lower, or crime actually decreased) than areas farther from stations, suggesting that small crowds of people around light rail stations actually served to deter crime.

   Also, consider these conclusions from UCLA urban planners about Los Angeles’ light rail Green Line: “Overall, most station neighborhoods have either experienced no change or have witnessed a reduction in crime after the introduction of the Green Line. Transit has certainly not brought more crime to the affluent suburban areas . . .”

   The lesson: It’s hard to find where light rail crime is making headlines, other than for Flaherty and O’Toole.

   For his part, Flaherty acknowledged in an email to The Star: “I did not do an exhaustive search on light rail crime. . . . I have no intention of challenging you on the issue. While one burglary doesn’t make a crime wave, it still warrants investigating. So too (does) light rail crime.”